Mars Rovers on New Missions

mycro writes "According to CNN, the Mars rovers are on a brand new mission. Because the Mars Spirit and Opportunity rovers are in such great condition and 'keep going and going', NASA will be using them for a longer period of time to study water, rocks, and formations on Mars." An anonymous reader writes "Today NASA has given its Opportunity rover a green light to enter the steep Endurance crater. Looking at deeper martian bedrock layers is considered now a rich enough science payoff to weigh favorably against the real chance that the rover cannot get back out of the crater."

Comments

Re:Why would they stop working?

[BTWR]

Just think of all the children that could have been fed with this $400 million. :( Or all the landmines that could be removed. Instead, we get playtoys for stupid white men. Micheal Moore needs to do his next expose on "science".

Everyone always answers this by saying "What if Columbus hadn't been funded?" A good argument, but then these ignorant guys go and say "Well, that funding wasn't for exploration, that was for MONEY" Perhaps that's half (or more than half) true. But here's my argument:

According to you (usually ultra-liberal people), I ask this:

Why do we spend a billion dollars a year on national parks? "We could better spend it to feed the homeless."

Why do we spend hundreds of millions of dollars on our national museums (No, they don't bring in more money then they take in). "We could better spend it to feed the homeless."

Why do we (here in New York City, but I'm sure a huge, adjusted, amount everywhere else as well) spend tens of millions of dollars on cleanup for parades for our veterans, the (insert sports team) victory parade, etc. "While it's sure nice to honor veterans, We could better spend it to feed the homeless."

Why do we have a Poet Laurette? An official national poet? There's also statewide and city-wide poets, and many are paid. Now, that's all nice and good, but "We could better spend it to feed the homeless."

I think I've gotten my point across. Not everything is simply "We could either a) buy a Mars Rover or b) Feed that guy living under the Golden Gate Bridge." Let's first forget that most of the four points above are NOT profitable, and yet NASA has directly caused the advacement of the trillion-dollar cellular, communication, computer, velcro, and aerospace industries.

The simple fact is that, like funding the Smithsonian and paying for a Veteran's Day parade - both good things, we don't always make EVERY financial decision based on helping the most desperate first.